W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > July to September 2001

Re: alt title and links

From: Matt May <mcmay@yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:30:55 -0700
Message-ID: <0a7201c1274a$c10ad3e0$6501a8c0@vaio>
To: "Jonathan Chetwynd" <j.chetwynd@btinternet.com>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jonathan Chetwynd" <j.chetwynd@btinternet.com>

> http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10/full-checklist.html
> 1.1 Provide a text equivalent for every non-text element [...]
> This does not mention links.

13.1 (Clearly identify the target of each link) is the relevant checkpoint
for links and the title attribute.

> If it is the case that alt should describe the image and title the link,
> we need to state this?
> if title is not appropriate for a description of the link, where should
> link description be?

The preferred method of link description is clear link text. According to
the 1.0 techniques
(http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10-HTML-TECHS/#link-text), title is only necessary
in the absence of clear link text which, presumably, would be provided in an
image's alt text.

In a case where the image itself presents content separate from the purpose
of the link (e.g., a picture of the Mona Lisa, which is a link to arts),
both could be necessary. But in most cases, I believe, the functional
content of a linked image is the necessary text equivalent. That is, this:

<a href="search.html"><img src="magnifyingglass.gif" alt="Search" /></a>

is preferable to this:

<a href="search.html" title="Search"><img src="magnifyingglass.gif" alt="a
magnifying glass"></a>

But in any case, this need is already provided for in both WCAG versions.


Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Received on Friday, 17 August 2001 14:30:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:33:38 UTC